Africa today

^;

cy pZ/iNCVV-SKT -g

Sû^

UNI TED NATIONS

IDEP/ET/XV/292

AFRICAN INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING FIRST DRAFT

- DAKAR -

—:

AFRICA TO-DAY

by

'B. OYRZANOWSKI

i

PART ONE; FACTORS UNITING AND DIVIDING AFRICA

IDEP/ET/XV/292

Page 1

AFRICA TO-DAY

B. Oyrzanowski

PART OIE - FACTORS UNITING AID DIVIDING AFRICA.

I. MY SHOULD AFRICA UNITE ?

There exists at present without the slightest doubt a very marked tendency towards economic cooperation, coordination and inte¬

gration among the countries of the world. The "European Economic Community", the "European Coal and Steel Community", the "Council

of Mutual Economic Assistance", the "Organization of American States"

and the like are examples of this tendency. It could he said

however that all these countries are much more developed than those

in Africa. The question could he raised whether.such a tendency is appropriate for countries at a relatively lower level of development

and whether economic development should not he achieved prior to

unity? Such an approach would he ahsolutoly wrong. The unity furthers

economic development greatly by making it easier and enabling it

to he achieved faster.

The economic reasons/for African unity are widely known and

have been discussed in numerous hooks and articles. They will only

he enumerated here rather than discussed.

(i)

Small size of national markets;

The small size of African Markets is the result of two factors.

One is the very small size of countries the majority of which have only one, tiro, three or four million inhabitants. The second fs

the low level of development and income which causes the purchasing

power of the population to he very small and the demand for particu¬

lar products to he very low. It is ^a very well known fact to economists that in each branch of economic activity there is a minimum size of an enterprise, below which the costs of production

IDEP/ET/XV/292

Page 2

are very high, making the enterprise unable to compete

with foreign

firms.

Thus, in order to make

possible

the

establishment of

an

indus¬

trial enterprise on a competitive basis, sufficient demand for its products must be secured. In great many cases, the demand

for parti-

lar products and services in single African countries would be too

small

for the firm to reach the minimum "optimum" size. But two, three or

more countries put together form a sufficiently big market for the product. The problem is thus to secure cooperation among a number of countries, with each specializing in a different kind of

production

with a "common" market large enough to establish in each branch a factory producing goods in quantities bigger than minimum optimum.

(ii)

Concentration of efforts and means.

Some big economic ventures require .a very big capital outlay.

For this reason they cannot be achieved by small and relatively poor countries. But a few countries put together, by pooling their resources may be able to finance such ventures in each country in turn.

(iii)

Common stand in the world market

It is a very well known fact that the African exports consist

of limited number of agricultural products and ores, the prices of which

show in the majority of cases a marked tendency to decline. This ten¬

dency could he limited to a certain degree by common agreement among the exporting countries which should improve their terms of trade.

(iv)

Lowering high costs of administration.

In the small relatively poor countries the burden of central governments, large parliaments with highly paid deputies, ministers

and foreign envoys is enormous. The integration of somo of these coun¬

tries could limit this burden to a certain extent.

IDEP/ET/XV/292

Pago 3

( v)

Lowering costs of transport

By planning and constructing common roads and railways and making navigable the great rivers, which, is often possible only on

an international scalo, considerable lowering of transport costs can be achieved.

(vi)

Economie independence.

Economic independence can be achieved if the countries them¬

selves produce the majority of basic agricultural and manufactured products. As was explained above, this cannot bo achieved immediately by small and relatively ^poor countries. However, through cooperation,

coordination and integration the African countries can in groups, become fairly independent of other continents in the not too distant

future.

These are the most widely known and- most important reasons for unity among African countries. This list could of course be extended.

A feeling that unity is desirable is already wide-spread among the

African countries ^- the best proof being the creation of the Organization

of African Unity in Addis-Ababa in 1963- To promote this unity in the

economic field it is necessary to have a very clear view of the diffe¬

rent factors which unite and divide African countries on their _way to economic development. The tendency to unity in Africa must not be

considered as leading straight away to the unity of the whole continent.

The whole _process will undoubtedly be gradual in two meanings of the

word. On the 0110 hand the countries will start to cooperate in some

separate ventures, then they will go on to coordinate their economic plans and finally they may begin to integrate some sectors of economic activity. On the other hand all these processes will start among two

or three countries only. Then they will embrace bigger groups of coun¬

tries, finally uniting in a more or less distant future possibly the

whole continent.

For this reason, when the tendency towards unity is considered,

it generally means the tendency to unify a few African countries and

not necessarily the whole of this vast continent. The organization

uniting all African countries also makes this regional cooperation easier.

idep/et/xv/292

Page 4

Before considering the factors that unite and those that divide Africa, it is necessary to underline that they are of two kinds:

The first are the factors which exert an influence in one or the other direction due to the similarities or differences cf conditions of African countries. For example, similarities of o]imatic conditions

enable common research work on the disease of cocoa plants useful to

a number of countries - it is a factor-uniting the countries producing

cocoa - on the other hand the climatic conditions which make it possi¬

ble to plant cocoa for export in a number of countries are a dividing

factor because they create competition among cocoa producing countries

on international markets.

The second are the factors that unite or divide Africa through

their particular characteristics! for example the Sahara, desert is

a barrier between North Africa and Africa south of the Sahara.

II. UUITIMG FACTORS

(i)

Geographical Factors

In order to have a clear view of the position of Africa, in

the world, three magnitudes should be kept in mind, The first is the

area of this vast continent amounting to more than 30 million square

kilometers, i.e. roughly 20 per cent of the total land area of the

world. The second is the population of Africa which exceeds 250

million inhabitants, i.e.

8,5

^per cent~of the world population.

The third figure to be remembered is the approximately calculated

value of product of the African countries amounting to around 2 per cent of the value of world product and roughly to US $ 110 per caput ,

only one quarter of the world figure.

table 1

afiticait SHARE IN the world area, population" aid product

Area : 20 _per cent

Population : 8,5 ^P°r oent Product ; 2 _por cent.

* *

idep/et/xv/292

Page 5

These figures make two things ^very clears first, that the

continent is 011 the whole relatively sparsely populated, and second^

that the product per caput is lower than the world average.

Africa is a continent with a relatively short length of coast¬

lines₁ they arc not very accessible and form few natural bays5 this

raises the cost of port construction. It is out across the middle by the equator which makes the zones to the North and to the South

more or less similar as to climatic conditions. There is a sufficient amount of sun and heat for vegetation, the development of which is

only limited by aridity. The aridity is caused not only by tho scarcity

of rainfall

(in

^some countries there is fairly high

rainfall),

but

adso by tho fact that the rainfall takes place during a relatively

short season which is at the same time the hottest season^ thus the heavy rains evaporate quickly and leave the soil.arid. Senegal,

Sierra Leone and Liberia supply examples of such conditions. Irriga¬

tion is thus quite often necessary for developing agriculture in Africa.

There arc 110 chains of mountains like the Himalayas in Asia

or the Andes in South America which practically cut the great conti¬

nents into half making communication across them if not impossible

at least difficult and expensive. The Sahara, although still an

.obstacle, cannot be compared with them.

(a^

These geographical conditions cause, groat similarity in

present possibilities of agricultural production and of export of some of them. The typical crops are sorghum, maize, yams, sweet potatoes, ground nuts, palm kernels, cocoa, coffee, banana,s, citrus fruit, rice.

Besides cultivation, the similar conditions make possible in a number

of countries the breeding of goats, sheep, cattle and camels. . This similarity of agricultural products points to the possibility of coope¬

ration, of improving the cultivation of these various plants and of breeding races of animals adapted to African condition.

Agricultural institutes could undertake research and experiments

to find the best seeds, plants and animal breeds for a number of

African countries. They should also find the methods of fighting plant and animal diseases which are endemic to these countries.

IDEP/ET/XV/292

Page 6

They should also find out the most appropriate kinds of ploughs to

he used, the "best mixtures of different fertilizers giving tho greatest results in crops and the like. Later on, special agricultural

experimental stations could supply the selected seeds and pure "bred animals which should form the "basis of improved production. The si¬

milarity of geographical conditions makes the cooperation of countries

in creating and maintaining such research institutes not only possible

but also advisable.

The fact that they export the same products makes it possible

for a number of countries to conclude agreements among producing

countries to defend the interest of exporting countries in obtaining

the best conditions and the highest prices on international markets.

The cocoa agreement is a good example of such possibilities.

(b)

Africa to-day is geologically not a very well explored

continent. But even the known mineral deposits show great diversity.

Iron ore in Algeria, Guinea, Morocco and UAR; copper in Congo and Zambia; coal in Congo, Nigeria and the Republic of South Africa;

petroleum in Algeria, Lybia, Nigeria and UAR etc... These resources show the great possibilities for different industries,leading to spe¬

cialization of particular countries ând to coordination of future de¬

velopment plans on the basis of complementarity of different products.

(c)-

Tho lack of great natural barriers facilitates transport

among the countries and lowers the e-òs-ts of-road and railway construc¬

tion.

(d)

The few "big African rivers act as a unifying factor among the countries for three different reasons ; they serve as lines of transport among the countries; they make possible schemes of irriga¬

ting the arid land; and finally they may croate by the construction

of dig dams, the sources of electric power which can be used by a number

of neighbouring countries in their industrialization effort. Coope¬

ration and coordination of plans between the UAR and Sudan concerning

the effects of construction of the High Bam on the Nile at Assuan

is the best example of such possibilities. The same kind of coopera¬

tion has be.en started in the basin of the denega,! River among Guinea,

I±)EP/ ET/XV/2 92

Pago 7

Mali, Mauritania

and Senegal and in the "basin of the Niger River among

Dahomey, Guinea,

Mali, ITiger and Nigeria.

(e)

It has already "been

said that the density of population

in Africa is "below the world average. The density in Africa amounts

to 8 inhabitants _per square Km., while the

world

average

is 22 inha¬

bitants per square km. Those figures do not

reflect the real situation

in a number of African countries on account of the desert land which

cannot be -utilised without enormous capital outlay.

To avoid the misconception arising from the fact that

desert

land

forms/large

part of the

total

area,

the density is quite often

of the total area

measured not _per square

km/of

^a country but ^per square Ion

of arable

land in a country. If we take into consideration the density of po¬

pulation both per square km of total area and of arable

land,

the re¬

sults for some African countries are the following:

TABLE 2

DENSITY OF POPULATION

(I960)

Inhabitants _per Inhabitants _per

square km.

square km. of arable land.

¥orld 22 213

Asia 62 383

Africa 8 106

Burundi 90 ²²¹

Dahomey ^{17 0}

Congo

(Leo)

⁶ 29

Liberia 12 68

Mali 3 ⁰

Morocco 26 136

Niger ^{2 0}

Nigeria 38 234

Senegal 15 ⁰

Sudan 5 166

Togo 25 67

UAR 26 993

\

* «

IDEP/ET/xv/292

Page 8

This table shows clearly that there are two or three African

countries which do not have a very high density per square km of

the total area but which have a very high density per square km of

arable land. They are UAH, Nigeria and Burundi. The

UAE

is from

this point of view as densely populated as some Asian countries§ Nigeria and Burundi are much less populated than the UAE but still

their high density becomes an economic problem. The other African

countries are not very densely populated and the scarcity of arable

land has not become a real economic problem as in the UAE or in Asia.

This means that in the great majority of African countries common

economic policies based on a relative abundance of land may be applied.

This relatively small density has also another important implica¬

tion, namely in inter-state relations. Practically speaking, in

Africa there are no tendencies for _any country to make claims on

territories cf neighbouring countries based on too great a demographic

pressure which was a common thing in Europe up till the recent world

war, The tendency to acquire territories from other countries in

order to accommodate too great a population is practically speaking

absent in Africa, and this is really an important factor which removes at least one of the obstacles to unity, even if it does not directly help to achieve unity. Existing boundary disputes like those between Ethiopia and Somalia, Somalia and Kenya or Togo and Ghana are not

caused by population pressure.

(ii)-

Historical and Political Factors.

All African countries with the exception of Liberia and Ethiopia

(if

we do not take into account the Italian occupation of the latter lasting only 6

years)

^succumbed sooner or later to the conquest of European powers: Prance, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Spain and Holland. Sometimes during a period of four centuries,

sometimes for ^a much shorter period, African countries were under

the domination of these six European countries. Luring this period

the metropolitan powers imposed on the majority of African countries

not only their administration but also their legal and economic systems,

»_I *

idep/et/xv/292

Page 9

their languages and culture. There were no serious obstacles to

this imposition, because at that time, of_.oonq.uest the European

powers were much more economically and socially developed than the

African countries. Exceptions to .this rule are the UAR, where the

British domination was not so complete and where at the same time

Arabic traditions were very well rooted, and Morocco for the same reason, which was conquered by France very late and which always

remained only a protectorate.

Egypt became independent first

(in

1922 ^the British Protecto¬

rate was ended, and in

1956

the British troops withdrew from the

Suez Canal

Zone)

; Lyb'ia in 1952; Morocco and Tunisia in

1956;

Ghana

in 1957? Guinea as the first among the former French colonies in

1958;

all the other French colonies:

(Cameroun,

Chad, Central African Republic,

Congo,(Brazza),

Gabon, Dahomey, Ivory Coast, Mali, Mauri¬

tania, Niger, Senegal, Togo, Upper

Volta)in 1960

and in the same year

Nigeria and Congo

(Léo);

Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania in

1963,

and

Malawi and Zambia in 1964. This independence achieved a short time

ago and at moro or less the same date did not permit the Afridan

continent to develop into separatei national entities.

(a)

We cannot here consider all the bad or possibly good

consequences of the colonial system in Africa. We are only concerned

here with the language. As a result of this system Africa may be

divided into throe big language groups.

In all the countries which were formerly Frenoh colonies, all

educated people speak French and in the former British colonies they speak English. In the whole of North Africa, Arabic is spoken on

an ever wider scale. Inside each of these three language groups of countries there is a great ^ease of oral and written communication

among the inhabitants which facilitates cooperation among these coun¬

tries. This applies also to the former French colonies and former

French protectorates like Morocco or former "parts" of France

like Algeria.

(b)

The fact that practically the same legal system was intro¬

duced by the former metropolitan powers also helps greatly in trade

and business matters.

IDEP/ET/XV/292

Page 10

(c)..Finally

the economic institutions

(which

are not only

similar hut even

common)

and the central hanking system are factors facilitating greatly economic cooperation among French speaking African

countries. There are two major central hanks5each covering a number

of countries. The "Banque Centrale des Etats de l'Afrique de l'Ouest

(BCEAO)

for Dahomey, Ivory Coast, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, Togo and Upper Volta and the "Banque.Centrale des Etats de l'Afrique Equatoriale

et du Cameroun

ÍBCEAE)

^for Cameroun, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo

(Brazza)

and Gabon. Both these banks cooperate very closely with

the Banque de France and the French Treasury, Without discussing whether

for the independent economic development of these countries, it would

be better to create independent central banks as was done by Guinea

and Mali, we may say that the existence of these banks greatly

facili¬

tates exchange, trade and all other kinds of business relations among these countries.

former

Still closer relations exist _among the

(three/British colonies

which were in a way united before independence; Kenya, Uganda and Tan-

zania. They

have/_common customs system,

/a

railway transport, postal

system and income tax department. This enables a very close cooperation,

coordination and undoubtedly partial integration. The same was true

for Zambia

(former

Northern

Rhodesia),

Malawi

(former Nyasaland)

and

Southern Rhodesia which broke apart on account of the political situa¬

tion in Southern Rhodesia where the people of European origin opposed

the introduction of a democratic government, preventing the country

from becoming independent.

Finally the African and Malagasy Organization for Economic Cooperation should be mentioned as uniting the majority of French speaking countries in Africa. This previously mainly political

organization has since the creation of O.A.U., become an organization fostering the economic cooperation.

The tendency of all those historical and political factors towards unity is further enhanced by the fact that practically all

African countries became independent within a few years of each

other particular national differences had no time to develop.

IDEP/ET/XV/292

Page 11

(iii)

Sociological Factors -

The great majority of African countries represent two socio¬

economic systems: either tribal or feudal. The capitalist system has developed only to a very limited extent, only in towns and re¬

present mostly foreign capital.

(a)

The. tribes form very strong entities in practically all

countries south of the Sahara. The people in a tribe are very strongly

linked together. Prom the point of view of economic development,

the lack of private ownership of land in the modern meaning has ^pre¬

vented fragmentation of land. Thus the introduction of cultivation

on a large scale in one form or another

(for

example

cooperatives)

is much easier than under a feudal or capitalist system. On the

other hand, tribal systems linking into one family even very distant cousins, five or six times removed, prepares very good ^{ground for}

the development of nepotism and for example obliges a minister to introduce into his ministry all sorts of distant relatives.

From the point of view of cooperation among the countries the tribal system is certainly a unifying factory although on one hand

it creates differences among different tribes inside one state, on the other hand it prevents too strong a feeling of nationalism which divides one country from another. Moreover if the political boundary

between two countries cuts one tribe into two, then it even tends

to reduce the significance of the boundary among the two countries

and _may facilitate cooperation.

The feudal system was most often introduced simultaneously with Islam by the Arabs from the North as far as they went. For'example " "

in Northern Nigeria, the emirates abolished to a great extent the

• . f • - -r

differences among the tribes inside the country. As a result of this, people in Northern Nigeria from- Hausa districts may move and settle in the Fulani.district, whereas it would still be practically impos¬

sible in Kenya for the Kikuyu to settle in thè Masai areas. But

the same feudal system which creates much greater unity inside a

country, at the same time shárpens the differences between the

countries.

IDEP/ET/XV/2

92 Page 12

(b)

Islam creates a certain unifying influence among the

Muslim countries5 for example, common pilgrimages to Mecca and

Medina.

Although the animistic beliefs did not help in any obvious way to foster unity among the African countries,at least they did not

create sharp antagonism, like those created by different Christian

sects during the XVIth and XVIIth centuries in Europe.

(o)

Social

(Occupational)

structure. The African countries

are predominantly■agricultural countries in which the great percentage

of the population is occupied in the agricultural sectors, as is usually the case of all under-developed countries. Countries like Gabon in which fairly large numbers are occupied in the mining industry

are rather exceptions.

The number of people employed in personal services is consi¬

derable, whichis characteristic for countries at a low level of deve¬

lopment. •

As there is no scaraity of land, with exception of the UAR, there

is no agricultural unemployment and overcrowding of rural areas. The unemployment centres are "the bigger towns". This common occupa¬

tional structure and the lack of unemployment with few exceptions

offer a common solution of a number of problems for many African

countries.

TABLE 3

OCCUPATIONAL STRUCTURE

CF AFRICAS ECONOMICALLY ACTIVE POPULATION

Total 1 1100 % '

T »

Agriculture ¹ Mining ' 'Manufacturing '

'Construction '

1 1

Trade ' Transport '

Services 1

' Congo

(Léo)

^{1955 ! 100 '} 85 ^{' 6} 3 '

, Morocco ^{1952 ï} 100 ^{t 71 . .} 17

' Sudan 1956 ^{'100 '} 87 5 ^{_ !}

, U. A. R. ^{1947 ,} 100 ^,

t T

! 1

54 Î

^

^,

1 1

t Î

30 ,

!

♦ * '

,

IDEP/ BT/XV/2

92

Page 13

(iv)

Economie Factors

(a)

The similar level of development

At the beginning of this part it is necessary to digress and make

some comments concerning statistics in general and African statistics

in particular. The accuracy of statistical data depends to a great

extent on the organization of statistical services, the number of expe¬

rienced statisticians, length of statistical experience and ^so forth.

For this reason in some African countries relatively less developed

and poorer, the statistics are worse than in the richer and economically

more developed countries. Thus lately in, four -countries .of -the world

after the last population censuses there appeared to be great differences

between previous- estimates and latest G-ensus-resuits.

In Ghana aftox1, the census, the population appeared in 1

960

to

be

6,7

millions instead of 5?2 millions0, in Liberia'the latest results

showed a population of over 1 million while previously it had been

estimated at 2 millions. In Nigeria the population-which was estimated previously at 36 millions after two censuses in

1962

and

1963,

came up

to 56 millions, and. finally in Saudi Arabia where the population ^was thought.to be 7 millions, it appeared to be only 335 millions.

We

may add that the population of Mauritania is considered to be probably double

the previous estimate. Thus the miscalculations varied from 20 to 50

per cent. The estimate of the national income are even more arbitrary

than population figures. When considering the national income per caput,

one must remember that this quantity is the result of a very rough esti¬

mate of the national income divided by the less inexact but also rather approximate figure in Africa of population in tho country. It is true

that a part of tho national income is calculated on the basis of popu¬

lation figure employed in the subsistence sector and on the average income per caput in this sector so that the fall or rise in the figures representing the population in this sector automatically diminishes, or increases the national income5 nevertheless the division of two inaccura¬

te figures by one another cannot give very exact results. For these

reasons the data concerning the national income per caput must be treated

as approximate giving rather the order of magnitude than exact measures.

I-DEP/ ET/XV/292

Page 14

♦ *

After this long digression it must be stated that the national

income per caput of African countries, although it is higher in some countries than in others

(for

example in Senegal US $ 180 and in Ethiopia US $ 35 which makes it approximately five times bigger in

the former than in the

latter)is

nevertheless in the lowest income group of the world, i.e. below US $250.

TABLE 4

NATIONAL IRCOME IN SOME AFRICAN COUNTRIES.

I 1

1Country 1

ï »

Year of iiistimaie US $ per Caput per _, annum.

jBurundi 1958 89 ,

,Congo

(Leo),

^{1959 70 ,}

'Dahomey

' 1959 65

;

,Mali , 1959 65

!

'Morocco ' 1958 HO '

I Î

,Mauritius , 1959 ¹⁸⁰

|

'ITiger ' 1960 65

;

* ï

(Nigeria , 1957 ⁸⁰

!

'Senegal 1 1959 180

1Sudan 1 1959 85

;

î f

,logo , 1959 90

!

•UAR '

! Î

1956 ^{, 110 <}

Data for Dahomey, Mali, Siger, Senegal and Togo quoted from "Planifica¬

tion en Afrique" by Henry Leroux? other datas from Economic Bulletin for.Africa Vol. Ill Nr. 1.

When we compare these incomes with the income of developed coun¬

tries, that is, roughly speaking, above US $500 and in the case of USA rising above US $2.000 ^, we see the distance to be covered cn

the way to development in Africa.

IDEP/ET/JÓ//

2 92 Page 15

Coming "back to the main problem, it should be stressed that,

while the incomes _per caput ^- which roughly reflect the level of development differ from country to country in Africa, they are on the whole

(with

the exception of the Republic of South

Africa)

relatively low.

(b)

One must arrive to the same conclusion when one considers

the other index of the low level of economic activity, i.e. the share

of the subsistance sector in the whole economy. The subsistence sector, is the sector in which people produce the majority of goods

for their own consumption, selling little and buying still less outside

their farms it is the main characteristic of backward economies. The countries in which this sector produces a great part of the- national

income and in which the market economy produces sometimes only one

third, must be countries with a low level o,f economic development.

TABLE 5

THE SHARE OF THE SUBSISTENCE SECTOR IB PRODUCING G.D.P.

,

Countries

^, Year of Estimate ^{The share of the ,}

subsistence sector

, Dahomey

!

^{1959 51 per cent ,}

' Gabon ^' 1960 14 per cent '

, Mali ^{1959 43 per cent ,}

1 Niger 1960 ^{70 per} cent 1

, Senegal ^, 1959 ^{15 per} cent ,

1 Togo 1958 29 per cent '

Both the national income per caput and the share of the subsis¬

tence sector in the production of the economy are evidence of the relatively low level of development of practically all African coun¬

tries. This fact puts in front of all African countx-ies a common end;

accelerated economic development.

IDÏÏP/îiT/XV/292

Page 16

* •

The similarity of conditions prevailing in all African countries

at present and ahove all their more or less similar starting point in

this pursuit of development enables them to use the same methods of comprehensive economic planning to achieve this aim. In the majority

of cases the planning method good for one country is good for all others.,

One main policy of developing agriculture and of industrialisation car- he applied to all countries,. One common aim and one similar method

of achieving it facilitates cooperation and even requires the coordi¬

nation of development plans.

To sum up; the geographical factors through the similarity of

climatic and soil conditions and diversification of mineral deposits|

the historical and political factors common for some groups of countries such as languages, institutions, legal systems etc... the similarities

in social systems and structure, and finally the same relatively low

level of economic development, favour greatly the drive towards African unity.

After considering these factors which make for cooperation, let

us now consider .the ..obstacles, to unity i»_e. the factors dividing Africa.

They will he considered in the same order-

Ill. - DIVIDING FACTORS

■ The dividing factors are to be considered in the same four

groups as the uniting factors. Quite often the same fact exerts at

the same time a unifying and dividing tendency. The problem is then

to enhance, in practice, its unifying tendencies and limit its dividing

effects.

(i)

Geographical factors. -

(a)

There is a great deal of barren land in Africai approximately

two thirds of the toial area are desert or semi-desert with shortage and bad. annual distribution of rain. This is a great obstacle to

economic development« The desert and semi-desert could certainly be

turned into arable land but only at enormous costs. These deserts

and semi-deserts increase greatly the distances between the urban

IDEP/ET/XV/292

Page 17

areas and areas of arable land ^~ lengthening Jhe numbers of km to

be covered by lorry or by train. The Sahara and other deserts, as

was explained above, are not so difficult to cross as mountain ranges, but the costs _per km of roads through it ^arc very high and

the

distances

to be"covered are' enormous. This creates a serious obstacle to commu¬

nication, and overland trade, for example between Algeria and Niger

or Algeria and Mali, is ^a mere trickle. This obstacle is

easily

over¬

come in the case of most countries with access to the seas but hot all countries have access to the sea and even among those which have

this access, much faster overland transport would make the exchange

of goods easier.

(b)

Competition in exported goods on the world markets.

The

similar climatic and soil conditions in a number of African countries,

enhanced by the similar low level of economic development, cause a great competition among African countries as far as the export of

agricultural products is concerned. The competition is specially Ctrong

for

bananas,

cocoa, coffee, ground nuts and

palm

kernels. It is

true that production of the seme goods by many countries makes possible

the establishment of common agricultural research institutes, etc,but on

the whole i-t'should be considered much more of a hindrance than of

help in unifying Africa. One could, however, argue that this obstacle

to cooperation may be overcome most easily through the intentional coordination of production plans for these products and common boards establishing export quotas, prices, etc. In future, when many countries

in the world increase their standard of living and raise their demand

for African tropical products, when a grea,tcr specialization among the

African countries is rea.ched and when the share of industrial ^commo¬

dities in their exports becomes greater, this obstacle to cooperation

will become smaller^ but at present, it plays a big part.

(ii)

Historical and Politica.! factors.

As a result of the colonial past, two big zones of countries consisting of fermer British and former French colonies and protecto¬

rates were created. It was explained above that this inheritance from

the colonial past had a great unifying effect inside ea,ch of these zones

IDEP/ET/XV/292

Pago

18

common

languages(of

educated people at

least),common legal

systems;

quite often similar or common institutions helped to unite each group of countries to a great extent. The situation is diametrally opposit

when one looks at it from the point of view of differences between

these two groups. Specially along the coast of West Africa,anglophone

and francophone countries are found next to each others Guinea- franco¬

phone, Sierra Leone and Liberia ^- anglophone. Ivory Coast - francophone,

Ghana - anglophone, Togo and Dahomey - francophone, Nigeria ^- anglophone,

Cameroun - francophone. Thus, among neighbouring countries where coope¬

ration could be closest the great barriers of different languages, dif¬

ferent legal systems, different

institutions,etc

were

erected.

The problem becomes all the more complicated because a large

number of Africans'with university degrees were educated in Prance and

in Great Britain; they constitute today the governments and in general

the elite. Prance and Great Britain, despite differences in culture

and despite their wars lasting with shorter or longer intervals for nearly ten centuries, have been on best political terms during the last fifty years. But it would he not too much to say that most of their

historical antagonism which today no longer exist, was moved onto the

colonial dependencies. The old prejudices no longer existing today in Europe between the two metropolitan powers have been transferred to

African countries. It is no exaggeration to say that today the differen¬

ces between an anglophone and a francophone country seem to be much ..

bigger than those between Prance and Great Britain.

It is true that behind these superficial differences, there may be real controversies of vested interests of big business in these two European countries. It is very well known that many big French firms

have invested capital in trade, industry, transport etc.. in the French speaking African countries*. Société de Manutention Africaine, Peyrissac etc.., are making bi$ profits on African markets. The same may be said of British firms, like John Holt, Barclay's Bank etc. Ho wonder

that each group of firms, French and British, guards and protects

its own sphere of interests. The actions of French and British govern¬

ments, helping on the whole only their own former colonies, aggravate

è *

IDEP/ET/XV/292

Page 19

this situation still further.

Quite often the timid, efforts of African countries to overcome these differences are stifled by the metropolitan powers. For

example, the project of building a cement factory on the Niger-Nigeria

border was finally abandoned due to the opposition of one of the

European powers. The same may be said about the project of construction

of a great road from Niger to the Nigerian ports in the South? on the

whole it _may be said that the two European powers are not going to help

much in promoting these unifying tendencies because it would be contra¬

ry to their present interests, as they guard their spheres of interest jealously. So it is up to the African countries, to overcome these

differences.

Certain gaps in these French-British barriers exist where political frontiers cut across tribes. For example a Haussa from

Northern Nigeria can communicate much easier with a Haussa from Niger

than with a man from Benin in Southern Nigeria. The same could be

said about the inhabitants of Togo aftd some from Ghana. But these excep¬

tions have not too great a significance.

(iii)

Social factors

It was explained earlier that the tribal system which counter¬

acts strong national feelings ^may rather help the movement towards

international unity than obstructs it. There is however one common characteristics

of/_tribal

/a system and to a lesser degree of ^a

feudal

system too : that is nepotism. It is not only an obstacle to develop¬

ment, but also an obstacle to unity. Very strong and big family or tribal

groups established in the governing position of some relatively small

African countries create centres of vested interests which may counter¬

act with all their strength the tendencies towards integration of two

countries even if these were in the interests of the majority of the population. It is often only by overcoming strong pressure groups of this type that economic integration of two or three countries can take place.